Template:Content

Template documentation[view] [edit] [history] [purge]

This template will categorise articles into Category:Accuracy disputes.

This template is not useful for Wikipedia:Subst.

Usage

This tag should be used when it is believed that particular information being deleted from an article is relevant and therefore should be allowed in the article. Importantly, the tag lets readers know they may not be getting the full story due to the exclusion of that piece of information. On the article's Discussion page, note the information you believe should be included before placing the tag.

The tag may assist in moving the dispute to the talk page, and reduce edit-warring, preventing piece(s) of information being repetitively inserted and deleted. If a consensus is reached that the information is not notable and relevant, the information is not added and the tag is removed. If a consensus is reached that the information is notable and relevant, the information is inserted in the article and the tag is removed.

Use {{Content}} to add the above message box to the top of an article or section.
Use {{Content|Talk page section}} to add the message box and link directly to the related section on the talk page.

Wikipedia project pages

Templates

Disputed factual accuracy

Boxes:
- {{Disputed}} For disputing entire article
- {{Dispute about|what}} For disputing part of an article
- {{Disputed section}} For disputing a section in an article
- {{Disputed tag}} For disputing recent promotions or amendments of policies and guidelines
- {{Under discussion}} For use on project pages (e.g., policies and guidelines), not on articles

Inline:
- {{Dubious}}, and {{Disputed inline}} Statement
- {{Under discussion inline}} Statements on project pages

Both accuracy and POV

Boxes:
- {{Controversial}} Talk page

Disputed neutrality (POV)

Boxes:
- {{POV}} Article, {{POV section}} Section, {{POV lead}} Lead section
- {{POV map}} Map

Inline:
- {{Unbalanced opinion}} Statement
- {{POV statement}} Statement

Citation and verifiability article maintenance templates
Sourcing	{{Circular}} {{Better sources needed}} {{Dubious}} {{Excessive citations}} {{Further reading cleanup}} {{Independent sources}} {{More citations needed}} {{More citations needed section}} {{More footnotes needed}} {{No footnotes}} {{No reliable sources}} {{No significant coverage}} {{One source}} {{One source section}} {{Only primary sources}} {{NRIS only}} {{Primary sources}} {{Primary sources section}} {{Religious text primary}} {{Self-published}} {{Self-reference cleanup}} {{Self-sourcing examples}} {{Refexample section}} {{Sources exist}} {{Text-source}} {{Unreferenced}} {{Unreferenced section}} {{Unreferenced category}} {{Unreliable sources}} {{Unreliable sources section}} {{User-generated}}
BLP-specific	{{BLP unreferenced}} {{BLP unreferenced section}} {{BLP primary sources}} {{BLP self-published}} {{BLP sources}} {{BLP sources section}} {{BLP IMDb-only refimprove}} {{BLP IMDb refimprove}} {{BLP no footnotes}} {{BLP more footnotes needed}} {{BLP one source}}
Topic specific	{{Localist}} {{Media IMDb refimprove}} {{More medical citations needed}} {{More science citations needed}} {{Neologism}} {{Science review}} {{Unreferenced law}} {{Unreferenced-law section}} {{Unreferenced medical section}}
Dispute-related	{{Cite check}} {{Cite check section}} {{Content}} {{Disputed}} {{Dispute about}} {{Disputed section}} {{Disputed chem}} {{Disputed list}} {{Disputed map}} {{Expert needed}} {{Hoax}} {{Original research}} {{Original research section}} {{Speculation}} {{Speculation section}} {{Synthesis}} {{Verifiability}} {{Verify sources}}
Citation improvements	{{Citation style}} {{Citations broken}} {{Cleanup bare URLs}} {{Format footnotes}} {{Full citations needed}} {{Ibid}} {{Page numbers improve}} {{Page numbers needed}} {{Shallow references}}
General advice	Citing sources Reliable sources Maintenance template removal Citation needed Find sources Combining sources Referencing styles

Speedway